French Stereotypes Meet American Politics: Bush, Kerry and the Campaign Rhetoric of 2004

George W. Bush and 1 Abstract A Franco-American discourse of derision became one of the more unusual and unexpected subtexts of the 2004 U.S. presidential election campaign. Longstanding variations in friendship and hostility between France and the U.S. improved with expressions of sympathy from France when the U.S. was attacked on September 11, 2001, but soon disintegrated into an exchange of mocking jokes and insults by politicians and journalists after the French refusal to support the U.S. in invading Iraq. When Senator John Kerry was nominated as the Democratic contender, Republicans seized on his French ancestry and language ability, attaching negative French stereotypes to his political and military record. The articles examines the political rhetoric of 2004 in light of the longstanding and on- going antagonisms between the US and the French which have resulted in a system of discourse that is drawn upon by media and members of the public as the need to arises. French Stereotypes Meet American Politics: Bush, Kerry and the Campaign Rhetoric of 2004 Marguerite J. Moritz, Ph.D. University of Colorado at Boulder Yohann Brultey University of Versailles St Quentin en Yvelines “Broad characterizations of other countries are the legacy of many layers of history and of various political disagreements, and in no case the result of a serious, let alone scientific, observation of a country or a society at any given moment in time.” Justin Vaisse, “American Francophobia Takes a New Turn,” French Politics, Culture, and Society 21, 2003 Introduction When the United States and France started trading insults over the proposed invasion of Iraq, it was not at all certain that their discourse of derision would become an important element in the 2004 presidential campaign. Indeed, the French position on any U.S. policy is unlikely to matter when Americans go to the polls. While France (and most of the rest of the George W. Bush and 2 world) may pay close attention to superpower politics, the reverse is rarely the case. Coming from a country with a deep sense of ethnocentrism, American citizens typically put America first. During four decades of the Cold War, foreign policy issues were largely discussed in terms of East-West oppositions. In the post-Soviet years, the focus of many presidential elections has been on economic issues such as jobs and taxes and on social issues like abortion and gay rights. But in 2004, notions of “the French” which had emerged a year earlier became one of the more unusual and unexpected subtexts of the presidential campaign, damaging for the challenger and powerfully useful for the incumbent. Disintegrating relations between France and America became part of the campaign trail, with President George W. Bush seizing any and every opportunity to transfer the negative valence of France - by then a ubiquitous feature in the US media - onto his opponent. From his looks to his ancestry, John Kerry became la cible facile of everything French. Meantime, a deterioration in the image of the US abroad, particularly in France where the media was far from shy in depictions of Mr. Bush as an inelegant, trigger happy Texan, was apparent. The paper examines the 2004 US presidential campaign rhetoric for what it reveals about the invocation, appropriation and circulation of French stereotypes in American politics, news media and popular discourse. Literature Antagonisms between France and the United States have a long and well-documented history. In Reconcilable Differences, Brenner and Parmentier demonstrate that as far back as France and America have had relations they have fluctuated between periods of friendship and hostility. This "unique mix of rivalry and cooperation” (1) is “undoubtedly the most unsteady" (2) of US relations with its Western allies . Former French president Jacques Chirac, speaking at the 20th anniversary of l’Institut Français des Relations Internationales in November 1999, said US-French relations "have been, are, and will always be conflictive and excellent. The U.S. finds France unbearably pretentious. And we find the U.S. unbearably hegemonic" (qtd in Brenner & Parmentier 116). The alternating discord and accommodation relate to a variety of George W. Bush and 3 historical issues and events inevitably tied to world power, but as Vaisse notes, the most lasting and stigmatizing criticism of France emerged in the aftermath of World War Two: The major historical event that froze a negative image of France in the American consciousness was the German military defeat of France in 1940. …the US would forever view France with condescension, as a secondary and dependent player on the international scene. …this is when the image of a helpless, feminine France took root…(18-19) Hoffman uses the term cliché to describe commonly held views that Americans hold about France, one being tied to France’s alleged inability to accept responsibility for the Vichy government (325) and the other painting French intellectual as supporting a Marxist- Communist–progressiste hegemony (327). The reference to Vichy France is linked to the notion of defeat, surrender, and cowardice, a common point of reference in the literature. The cliché about Marxist-Communist hegemony, while not as prominent as references to France’s role in World War II, is nonetheless alive and well in the US, a topic to be taken up later in the paper. But whether they are considered clichés, stereotypes or generalizations, rarely is this received wisdom firmly rooted in fact, as Vaisse notes. Broad characterizations of other countries are the legacy of many layers of history and of various political disagreements, and in no case the result of a serious, let alone scientific, observation of a country or a society at any given moment in time (18). Nonetheless, these over-simplifications “remain very persistent despite the dynamism of the societies they purport to represent” (18). Moreover, in the case of American stereotypes of France, the old clichés remain unchanged and have not be supplanted by new ones. They instead offer a “lively treasure-trove of Francophobe images, insults and discourses” that are “ready for use whenever the need arises, about Frenchmen, about French society and about French foreign policy.” (p 19) Indeed, Jean Philippe Mathy identifies a “System of Francophobia” (1) in which a mix of stereotyped texts, images and attitudes about a society, a culture, a government, political leaders and various iconic figures have coalesced over many years into a derisive discourse that will be accessed as needed by the media when a news event thrusts France into the headlines. The associated discursive concepts are culturally resonant precisely because of a familiarity that makes them appear natural and beyond questioning. George W. Bush and 4 Certainly, mainstream media are deeply implicated in the circulation of anti-French discourse which, like many other longstanding media narratives (for example, about racial groups, women, gays, youth, the elderly and the poor) is played and replayed in countless representations in both news and popular culture, each cross-pollinating the other. This kind of prejudice is particularly insidious for groups about which citizens have limited or no first hand knowledge. Ferber finds American media especially lacking in coverage of French culture. “The few times French characters are in the media, writers usually ridicule them.” Knox looked at news coverage in the New York Times, arguably the most respected news organization in the US, and found that in an 18 month sample of reporting on French topics, “the rhetoric of the New York Times too often filters and colors the information conveyed in a way that invokes and reinforces prior stereotypes, reducing rather than expanding the reader's horizons”(1179). Vaisse speaks of a turn to Francophobia—perhaps it would be more accurate to call it a “return” to Francophobia. Historical Context Historically speaking, the relationship uniting France to the United States can indeed be seen as at least complicated, if not contradictory. As Richard Brookhiser explains in an article entitled “France and Us,” Franco-American relations date back to the 17 th century, with the colonization of the St. Lawrence valley, followed by the establishment of friendly relationships with the local Indian tribes. After a series of wars leading to defeat from 1689 to 1763, it was generally thought that France would have no more role to play in the New World—but a few years later, French troops were back in America to support the revolution and take revenge against Britain. In 1787 the Constitution was written, and 1789 George Washington was inaugurated as the first president of the young nation—three months later, the Bastille was stormed (Brookhiser 2003, 28-30). For Brookhiser, “no other nation except Britain has been so deeply entwined in [US] history and [its] psyche” (Brookhiser 2003, 28). But it’s both for the best and the worst, beginning with the Franco-American war, also known as the Quasi-War, that saw French privateers harassing American ships on the grounds that the United States would not help France in its struggle against Britain. The beginnings of a beautiful but double-sided George W. Bush and 5 friendship—to quote Brookhiser again, “France was both the bogeyman of our national childhood and the protective older brother of our adolescence” (Brookhiser 2003, 28). Historians Bozo and Parmentier see the relationship between the two nations as highly cyclical, especially since the beginning of the 20 th century: cooperation quickly leaves place to tension, and conversely—a perfect example being Charles de Gaulle’s relentless attempts to establish France as the United States’ strongest ally in the late 1950s, followed by a steep deterioration of the relationship in the wake of the 1966 NATO withdrawal (Bozo and Parmentier 2007, 181-4) While 2004 was the first time in memory that France became so much a part of a U.S.

Load more